Semantic models and services for conservation and restoration of cultural heritage: a comprehensive survey

Tracking #: 2900-4114

Efthymia Moraitou
Yannis Christodoulou
George Caridakis

Responsible editor: 
Special Issue Cultural Heritage 2021

Submission type: 
Survey Article
Over the last decade, the Cultural Heritage (CH) domain has gradually adopted Semantic Web (SW) technologies for organizing information and for tackling interoperability issues. Several semantic models have been proposed which accommodate essential aspects of information management: retrieval, integration, reuse and sharing. In this context, the CH subdomain of Conservation and Restoration (CnR) exhibits an increasing interest in SW technologies, in an attempt to effectively handle the highly heterogeneous and often secluded CnR information. This paper investigates semantic models relevant to the CnR knowledge domain. The scope, development methodology and coverage of CnR aspects are described and discussed. Furthermore, the evaluation, deployment and current exploitation of each model are examined, with focus on the types and variety of services provided to sup-port the CnR professional. Through this study, the following research questions are investigated: To what extent the various aspects of CnR are covered by existing CnR models? To what extent existing CnR models incorporate models of the broader CH domain and of relevant disciplines (e.g., Chemistry)? In what ways and to what extent services built upon the reviewed models facilitate CnR professionals in their various tasks? Finally, based on the findings, fields of interest that merit further investigation are suggested.
Full PDF Version: 

Minor Revision

Solicited Reviews:
Click to Expand/Collapse
Review #1
By Vincenzo Lombardo submitted on 16/Nov/2021
Major Revision
Review Comment:

I still think that the paper, being submitted as a survey article, is still at a technical report level.
The list of 16 models comes out "after a thorough bibliographic search" (p.4) on several data sources (p.3). We do not anything about their their value (how many applications they received) or what models have been left out (probably none).
The paper reduces to a mere list with obvious dimensions, not harmonized. I am wondering, for example (but several other questions may arise), why chemistry/material sciences and not biologic/pedologic realms, which are responsible for large deterioration issues. At least their absence should be explained.
A suitable dataset or pointers to datasets should accompany this paper. as said previously, a paper like this (an interesting topic to build a survey on) should produce a web resource (end of 2021).